Shall I
Compare Thee to a Stand-Alone
Compression Module?
“Good
technical writing and good poetry are
surprisingly similar.” I came across
this line in one of the textbooks for an
English class I teach. Everyone in the
class immediately went slack-jawed. Even
those in the class who are normally
lantern-jawed went slack-jawed, and if you
have ever seen one of those brass and
glass gizmos that conductors on the
Northern Pacific used to shoo cows off the
tracks lose its shape, well, let me tell
you, it’s an awesome sight. It would make
that shape-shifter guy, Odo, on Star
Trek, Deep Space 9, have a major
meltdown of morph envy right there on the
spot.
“By all the iambs of Helicon,
professor, surely those clowns must be
joking,” said an astute student
(hereafter referred to, simply, as
‘Stew’). What makes them think that any of
that old dead doggerel can hold a
candle—much less a lantern—to all the
great stuff being ball-pointed into
posterity by some of our fine
technoscribes?
“What did you say?” I rejoindered.
“You rejoined her what?”
"No, ‘rejoinder,’ as in ‘query,’ ‘ask,’ as
in I wanted to know what it was you just
said."
“Oh, I said, ‘By all the beakers of
blushful Hippocrene, what makes…”
“That’s what I thought you said,” I
thought she said. “That’s real food for
thought.”
“Of course. Why do you think they call me
Stew?”
Our class sessions used to go on like that
for hours, so I was not alarmed. I was,
however, struck by her comment. I was then
struck by a number of the larger students
in the class when I suggested that they
write about poetry vs technical writing.
"You do it," they said. "You teach
this stuff, so you should be able to write
it real good. And believe us," they said,
"we can tell. Remember: Good Stuff talks
and Bad Stuff walks," they said. (I recall
that they used the abbreviation for Bad
Stuff.)
Yes, poetry is alive and well, as I can
vouch for now that I have been delving
into this relationship between poetry and
technical writing, and as my vouchers are
about to expire, I’d better delve right
along. True, we no longer seem to have an
awful lot of people waxing poetic —heck,
you can’t even get them to wax your car—
these days over “the stars of midnight,”
“true maiden’s breasts,” or “the dew of
morning”. Even a phrase such as Yeats', “The
dews drop slowly and dreams gather,”
is, as Ezra Pound, T.S. Elliot and
Gertrude Stein once said, “…less than
acipitous in its mesothesis.” (Yes,
they all said that together; you can
imagine how much practice it took to get
that mouthful out all together. They were
sitting around having a beer. That comes
out to 1/3 of a beer each, I know, but
Pound, a notorious lush, drank most of
it.)
As Stew noted, much of that
old stuff just doesn’t have what it takes
to move modern souls. What?— “To be or not
to be, that is the something or other”?
Come on, what is that suicidal noodling
all about?! Or “I wandered lonely as a
cloud…” Right, let’s hear it for
overanthropomorphic metaphors, poetry
fans! Literati refer to that as “pathetic
fallacy”: attributing human qualities to
inanimate objects, such as ‘an angry sea,’
‘a stubborn door,’ —or ‘a lonely cloud.’
Pathetic fallacy. Right on both counts.
What has happened recently is that
sensitive souls, who in the past would
have practiced their “craft and sullen
art” by describing nature, love and
yawnful things like that, are now writing
technical manuals for computers. Witness
this especially moving passage by one of
our fine young Spanish (well,
Scottish-Spanish) technical writers,
Manuel Macintosh: